You are here: Home | Forum | Updated: Boris resigns as party leader
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most of the discussions, articles and other free features. By joining our Virgin Media community you will have full access to all discussions, be able to view and post threads, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own images/photos, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please join our community today.
Services: Humane elimination of all common Internet pests
Posts: 36,928
Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
Actually , the issue is whether this was really a party. It was nothing more than a small break from work. Just like in Kier Starmer and his beer on his break. What’s the difference?
Whataboutery is the last defence of the indefensible. If Starmer has broken the law he’ll get a fine, and then we can talk about his moral authority as leader of the opposition.
For now, Bozzer has been fined and his moral authority is compromised. You have been swerving that issue all afternoon - I suspect you know perfectly well that there’s a problem here which is why you’re avoiding the question rather than outright denying it.
Whataboutery is the last defence of the indefensible. If Starmer has broken the law he’ll get a fine, and then we can talk about his moral authority as leader of the opposition.
For now, Bozzer has been fined and his moral authority is compromised. You have been swerving that issue all afternoon - I suspect you know perfectly well that there’s a problem here which is why you’re avoiding the question rather than outright denying it.
In this case, whataboutery is perfectly valid. If the PM gets a fine in similar circumstances to the Leader of the Opposition, who didn’t get a fine, how does that figure?
Both had a break from work amongst colleagues. Does a cake constitute a party but not a beer?
Well, you won’t agree with even the most logical argument on this subject, so we’ll have to agree to disagree. I have more important stuff to worry about than this nonsense.
Services: Humane elimination of all common Internet pests
Posts: 36,928
Re: All those No.10 lockdown parties
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY
In this case, whataboutery is perfectly valid. If the PM gets a fine in similar circumstances to the Leader of the Opposition, who didn’t get a fine, how does that figure?
Both had a break from work amongst colleagues. Does a cake constitute a party but not a beer?
Well, you won’t agree with even the most logical argument on this subject, so we’ll have to agree to disagree. I have more important stuff to worry about than this nonsense.
As I said … you’ve been desperate to avoid the issue all afternoon.
You know Boris Johnson’s moral authority has been tanked. But you’ve stood by him throughout, so admitting that is admitting you’re wrong. Which you seem ill-equipped to do.
I think Peston nails the seriousness of things here. Even those who have voted Conservative all their lives must appreciate the likely weakening in British democracy if Johnson stays.
Quote:
The police have today concluded that the PM, the Chancellor and the PM’s wife all attended illegal parties, that breached Covid laws written by the PM.
This is most serious for Boris Johnson of the three of them, because it was he who told MPs on 8 December that he had been “repeatedly assured” there were no parties and that no Covid rules were broken.
He now has the challenge of his life to prove that he did not wilfully and knowingly mislead MPs - because if he did deliberately mislead MPs then he has no choice but to resign under the code of conduct for ministers, which he signed off and approved in keeping with normal practice on becoming prime minister.
This is perhaps the most important test of the robustness and efficacy of the checks and balances in the British constitution of my lifetime. If Tory MPs unthinkingly keep him in office without a proper and public assessment of how parliament was misled, because that is what suits them, and if they blithely ignore the Ministerial Code, then the charge will stick that this or any party with a big majority is simply an elected dictatorship, and the constitution means little or nothing. This is not just a slippery slope. It is the bottom of the slope.
Didn't stop the Conservatives in 1940, or the Coalition in 1916…
Both of your examples refer to wartime Governments (as if you didn't know) Asquith was replaced due to the shortage of munitions and we all know why the other idiot was replaced.
You don't need to be an expert to know a scheme that lost 5 billion pounds to fraud isn't a right call, I'm sure all the other countries that paid through their equivalent of PAYE had some fraud to btw
In this case, whataboutery is perfectly valid. If the PM gets a fine in similar circumstances to the Leader of the Opposition, who didn’t get a fine, how does that figure?
Both had a break from work amongst colleagues. Does a cake constitute a party but not a beer?
Well, you won’t agree with even the most logical argument on this subject, so we’ll have to agree to disagree. I have more important stuff to worry about than this nonsense.
It seems the police have a cake investigation dep't but don't have a pizza n beer investigation dep't ,probably put too many resources into the kebab investigation team.
__________________
To be or not to be, woke is the question Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer. The slings and arrows of outrageous wokedome, Or to take arms against a sea of wokies. And by opposing end them.
Both of your examples refer to wartime Governments (as if you didn't know) Asquith was replaced due to the shortage of munitions and we all know why the other idiot was replaced.
Plenty of people arguing that now is not the time to replace Johnson as the West is at war with Putin.
You don't need to be an expert to know a scheme that lost 5 billion pounds to fraud isn't a right call, I'm sure all the other countries that paid through their equivalent of PAYE had some fraud to btw
So you don’t know either.
__________________
The wheel's still turning but the hamsters dead.
Yes, because they didn't regard a 9 minute presentation of a birthday cake by colleagues while at work a party. So no deliberate intention to mislead.
---------- Post added at 08:36 ---------- Previous post was at 08:30 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
As I said … you’ve been desperate to avoid the issue all afternoon.
You know Boris Johnson’s moral authority has been tanked. But you’ve stood by him throughout, so admitting that is admitting you’re wrong. Which you seem ill-equipped to do.
Hence transparent deflections like the above.
I think the number of posts I have added to this thread since it was revealed that the PM had been fined shows clearly that I have not ducked the issue at all. I didn't think he would get fined, and I was wrong about that.
However, having heard what he was fined for, I believe that decision by the police to have been wrong. But to appeal would just drag the whole thing on even longer. I think the public will come to see this as the trivia it is over time. This may impact on the local elections as they are now imminent, but not the General Election.
First it was 10 minutes, now it's 9 - by the time of the Local Elections, OLD BOY will be saying that it was a couple of seconds, and if we could all just wait for the Sue Gray report, that would confirm this...
(and when it doesn't, it will be a litany of cake/Starmer/fluff/trivia/get on with the job/whatever the latest line he gets from the Whips' WhatsApp feed)
Remember all those day/weeks/months ago when OLD BOY said we shouldn't make up our minds before we knew what the outcome of the Police investigation was, because he was keeping an open mind, and we should too - his comment above shows he was as economical with the actualite as Johnson was...
Quote:
I believe that decision by the police to have been wrong
He was obviously keeping an "open mind" as long as the Police verdict agreed with his preconceived outcomes...
__________________ There is always light.
If only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it. If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
To much of the general public it always has been 'much ado about nothing', however it's been a nice little earner for clickbait article writers, a Godsend for political activists, and an ongoing filler item for news channels that couldn't be bothered to find other subjects for their 'experts' to discuss
To much of the general public it always has been 'much ado about nothing', however it's been a nice little earner for clickbait article writers, a Godsend for political activists, and an ongoing filler item for news channels that couldn't be bothered to find other subjects for their 'experts' to discuss
Have to disagree - I know lots of people who couldn't visit relatives in care homes, didn't visit friends/families because it was stressed how important it was to keep to the rules, and they are (mostly) pissed off that there seems to be one rule for selfish gits and other rules for everyone else.
Anyhoo, might just head out and break the law - not knowingly, of course, just for a few minutes - I mean, the laws are so stupid and there are so many of them, and they are so confusing.
Or, seeing as according to some on here and in the tabloid press, we shouldn't investigate "crimes that happened in the past", and we no longer need to worry about "crimes that didn't take long" and "crimes when there is armed conflict going on anywhere in the world" either, I might join the police - sounds like an easy life.
__________________ There is always light.
If only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it. If my post is in bold and this colour, it's a Moderator Request.
To much of the general public it always has been 'much ado about nothing', however it's been a nice little earner for clickbait article writers, a Godsend for political activists, and an ongoing filler item for news channels that couldn't be bothered to find other subjects for their 'experts' to discuss
This isn't true though. You're assuming you represent the 'general public'.
A snap poll for YouGov found 57% of voters thought he should resign and 75% said he had knowingly lied, while a survey by Savanta ComRes showed 61% said he should quit
Join CF
You are here: 
